I remember Flintknapper Gene doing a similar effect but he undercoated his paint job silver then picked at the topcoat off with tape, (in a craftsmanly fashion, of course). I kinda think it was a Kawasaki Hien he was on at the time. But really RD that is a job well done and I appreciate the effort and the convincing result. The plastic guys have a few websites out there where they really pull off some convincing effects as well.

I have dealt with the Old Engine supplier and found him totally reliable and helpful. I is good to be able to get the correct sized O Rings ans also other parts as well as motors.
Ricky

Hi David,
Regarding motors for free-flight the choice is yours, there are many brushed and brushless motors which need an ESC to choose from and it depends on the planned weight of the model, which can depend on finish and how heavy it is built. So I won’t make recommendation.

It also has been left to the builder’s experience on which motor to use when building the RC version.

There are flight profilers such as the one sold by Dens Model Supplies which can control how the motor runs, and a similar one is offered by from Atomic Workshop along with motors as does Derek Knight's KP Aero Models. Actually, his KP02 Power Unit might be perfect for the free-flight Gladiator.

I am a woodturner ( I would imagine there are others on this site) and if necceserry I can turn anybody who wants one (UK only) a wooden cylinder the correct size to form the cowl on, cost of postage plus nominal fee would suffice if this would help

Dan. Yes I think Dave's was an early kit so it sounds like the latest VMC kits have sorted any issues.

I will check the fin/rudder size on my Aerographics Laser Cut version though to be sure

Chris . To be honest I had forgotten that Old Model Engine were selling them again. I've never bought anything from them so not sure how reliable they are.

Yes the cowling looks challenging in the old kit version, sounds like I'll have to go on a 2 3/4" tin hunt 

 Saw the video  of the "Ukranicanard" at  the Scale Nats, another winner Charlie. Looks like a great flier in the making.
  For some reason I keep looking at  a Rover 75 belonging to my neighbour and  think it looks like it would make a good lifting body model, a bit Thunderbird 2 ish .
     May need a change of meds.... Cheers Phil.

I'm sure I recall DC saying in his review that his was a very early, almost pre-production kit and that Aerographics would be addressing the issue with the fin/rudder size in later production versions. I have no idea if this happened, though...

Cheers,

Dan.

Thank you Chris, that is very useful and the history of the cowl entertaining.  I have found that in the US for example they often have different size cans etc. from us which adds to the fun.

Asa matter of interest what electric motor is used for the Gladiator. FF version, please. and do you know if a control board is available so that the rpm can be automatically adjusted in flight as well of course as the rpm generally.

Hi Chris,
The reason that the cowl was redesigned for both the rubber and power versions was because the original design requires 5 laminations of 1/32nd balsa being wrapped around a 2¾” (69.85mm) diameter tin or bottle to form the cowl.
This requires 5 lengths of 1/32nd sheet approximately 30mm wide by 220mm in length to be cut and assembled from the supplied sheet in the kit (as you will find out). This requires the builder to stick three pieces of balsa together from the supplied 3-inch-wide sheet for each layer (x5) and then cut them to the correct length.

But the bigger problem was that when researching the project, I could not find a suitable tin or bottle of the right diameter, nor could I find a tube of any type with the correct diameter (and yes, I did go around my local supermarket and DIY store with a digital calliper to see if I could find a suitable widely available tin, bottle or other tube, and I got some strange looks while doing this!).
Knowing this would cause the builder and therefore VMC problems (from kit builders asking VMC where they could source a suitable tin, bottle, or tube) I decided to redesign how the cowl was constructed.

When I started the project over nearly 4 years ago, Gasparini the designer and manufacturer of the Gasparin motors had retired and ceased manufacturer of the motors and there was great doubt over future supplies (it now seems that Old Model Engine seem to be manufacturing them again). So, the decision was made to go for the electric motor option (although it is stated the kit is suitable for CO2) along with other changes to make the kit suitable and easy to convert to RC (with the added benefit of providing trimming options for free-flight) with movable control surfaces.

However, looking at the ‘Old Engine Model’ site, I personally would not buy from this site. It is not secure (does not use Https:// so your personal details are not secure), there are also no ‘contact details’, ‘terms and conditions’ or ‘about us’ content. So, who do you contact should anything go wrong?

Also, you are likely to get charged import duty, VAT and have an additional charge levied by the carrier to collect both the duty and VAT on top of what you paid.

I appreciate that OZPAF

Hi Nigel

 Sorry my mistake I had forgotten that they are now available again from Old Model Engine. That makes it even more of a shame that VMC haven't included details of the GM300 installation in their latest kit . Interest in CO2 motors has declined but things like that don't help. There's something rather magical about a FF model flying overhead with it's CO2 motor purring away

Hi Chris, do you mean the GM300 are no longer made? The oldmedelengines website still shows a wide range of GM and derivative CO2 motors and products, http://www.old-engine-model.com/en/gasparin-co2-engines/ and allows you to add items to the cart. Has there been news they are no longer trading? I noted the Contact webpage link displays no content on my browser.

GM300 specifically here http://www.old-engine-model.com/en/1041.g-300/  A very reasonable 89Euros, although whether VaT now applies to that, I am unsure. Perhaps out of date?

cheers
Nigel

Hi Chris

I'm using an Old Aerographics kit but the later laser cut version. The original kit was pretty much designed for the GM300 but I guess as they are no longer made VMC have shown electric power instead.

Looking at the plan there's a small amount of downthrust indicated but I'm going to go with Dave's thoughts and probably build in 3 deg. ( or maybe more)  with scope to add more if needed . 3 degs down and 3 right is pretty standard starting point anyway

I suspect from your comments about the cowling the front end has been redrawn for the brushless mountings

Thank you, I like the option of taking snapshots of the wing/stab/fuselage and then enlarging them and fitting them to print full size on the usual letter size, that will definitely save paper and matching everything up. But that's several steps and I'm lazy and was hoping that, given that it seems that a lot of people have built this plane, I don't have to reinvent the wheel and some ready-to-go files are already available? Thanks for the info about the measure tool, I haven't used that, good to know about!

Chris,
Are you using the original Aerographics kit or the new VMC one? The new VMC kit does not show a CO2 option, but now shows options for brushed or brushless motors. The brushless motor mount I am sure could be adapted for a GM300. The plan recommends 2 degrees of down thrust (as per the original design) which is what I used on my RC built version and it flies well. The way the cowl and motor mounts are built are different from the original, partly due to the need to find a can of just the right diameter to use to wrap the sheet on 1/32nd balsa around as required in the original! Laser cutting allows for a simpler method of construction of the cowl using less wood!

Warning.  Do not buy gampi from Graphic Chemical and Ink Co. in Illinois.  They do not have any in stock.  It is difficult to contact the company.  They do not respond to emails and rarely answer the phone.  But they are only too keen to charge your credit card!  Avoid.

Hi Flyguy--

That's really interesting! Didn't realize the online/download files for this Cassutt were not full size.  

In the meantime, here is a work-around for consideration, building on Ian's post.

The plan in the gallery is probably a copy of the INAV page, so it is formatted for letter size.  Fortunately, there are 3 key dimensions on the drawing that can be checked/used to generate a full size "build" copy.

They are the flat span (15-⁷/₈"), the stab span (8"), and the prop radius (4.5").

In Adobe Reader, the measurement tool gave me the following measurements for the pdf at full size (100%):

Span 6.31"

Stab span 3.22"

Prop radius 1.78"

To verify the enlargement ratio, I divided the dimension shown by the actual measurement.  

Span  15.875/6.31=2.516

Stab span   8/3.22=2.484

Prop radius  4.5/1.78=2.528

So, as expected, the enlargement factor isn't the same for all 3!  One of the problems with an n^th generation copy of a copy, of a hand drawn plan... there is likely some distortion, as well as slight measurement error.  The line widths alone introduce some "fuzziness."

But since no-cal is a wingspan limited event, that is the key dimension to watch; I would just go ahead and print the plan at 251.6% to keep the span close to the 15-⁷/₈" as shown on the plan.  The stab will be a little longer than 8", but the prop radius will be a little short of 4.5", using the 251.6% enlargement "across the board."  Another thing that I always check is symmetry of the wing and stab. You will find that the left panel is slightly shorter than the right side. Maybe it was meant to be; just a heads up.  The stab looks ok.  

There is a snapshot option in Adobe, where you can "highlight" just a portion of the plan, such as the stab only, fuselage only, etc  and print just that.  It saves a lot of paper and minimizes the "stack up" errors trying to tape a bunch of "tiles" together.  The fuselage will be about 20.5" long overall, so it will fit on 2 sheets, a legal + a letter, printed landscape. The legal-size sheet could be used for the front of the fuselage (snapshot #1--spinner to approx the "race 40"emblem) and the letter sized sheet from there to the tail (snapshot #2) with some overlap near the emblem. The wing will fit on 2 letter sheets, also printed landscape. This allows for sufficient overlap, and clearance from the edge of the paper.  Obviously, the stab will print on one letter sized sheet, landscape.  When printing the highlighted snapshot, you can select the enlargement factor and paper orientation, and get a "preview" before you actually print the item. (see screenshot)



Sorry for the long winded reply, but thought it may help others who haven't fully explored the different print options (and pitfalls) when trying to print a resized file.  I always found the poster/tile printing to be kinda  "fiddly."  The splices always seem to break up a feature on the plan; it just seems easier to pick where you want the splice if one is needed.  On smaller models it is often possible to get the entire fuselage or wing onto one sheet with no splices, or at most 2 sheets taped together.  





  

Well the Aerograhics kit certainly makes a lovely looking aeroplane

Peter your Gladiator is every bit as impressive as I remember , love the sliding cockpit.

Your Rc version flys very well Chris, I going to have to build my kit now. I will be building mine for FF with a GM300 though

I can't find a copy of Dave Causers article he did for Model Flyer but I did get some info from him via an email (via Bryanair)


Dave found that the design needed about about 4 degrees of both down and right thrust for a left/left pattern. No provision is shown for adjustment on the plan so could prove tricky to create . Dave also built a scale sized fin and rudder as the Aerographics one is enlarged slightly. This Dave found this gave better spiral stability

Rigged like this Dave found the GM300 to be ample power and the Gladiator a good flyer

I now plan build mine with 4 degrees of down and right thrust built in and with a scale size fin, probably like Peter's lovely example in Shuttleworth colours. I even have a couple of 3 bladed props for the GM300 somewhere

Here's some pics of Dave's beautifully built example

Basics on resizing plans.
First, find the size of a part that you will use as your baseline. Usually this is the wingspan. For instance, I want to have a wingspan of 32 inches. Next fire up Adobe and load your plan into it. Find out what the printed wingspan would be. Click on TOOLS and then select MEASURE. This puts you back to your plan and adds another tool bar. Select MEASURING TOOL. You get a popup that says 'Distance Tool'. It will display the distance that you are measuring. Click on one tip of the wing, then on the other. It will draw a line over the plan and give you the distance covered. Now you have the measurement on the plan; for instance 23.5 inches, and the measurement that you want: 32 inches.

  When you go to print out the file, you need to know what your conversion factor will be. This is always

  Percentage = Desired size * 100 / Actual size

  Percentage = 32 * 100 / 23.5 = 136.17%

This formula works whether you are increasing or reducing a plan.

ian

I downloaded the Cassutt Racer plans from the Builders' forum, but it prints (full size) as reduced (by over 50%), not full size. I tried printing it (poster style) at 270% which was close but still a little off. Can someone tell me how to print the plans full size or where I can get them (I ordered the Cassutt 1 from Aeroaces, but that's a different version) or did I miss something?

Yes the Scout gets my vote too. I was also very impressed with the way the Miles rode the breeze with near-scale dihedral. The daisies were very useful because you could see the gusts approaching. A great day to re-kindle enthusiasm for flying.

Results are already on the STC website: https://scale.bmfa.org/scale-comp-results-north-luffenham-free-flight-nationals

Thanks for all that, Chris. What a splendid day we had!
Just a couple of pics to add- Chris Brainwood’s Miles Falcon which came 2nd in Rubber, and my Bleriot which was 3rd. Chris has the Falcon flying really rather nicely now, despite the tricky conditions. As for the Bleriot, I did get one long high flight as well as the shorter ones in the video, but it was a bit breezy for it and it’s lost a bit of form lately anyway. I think I need to do a bit of retrimming on a calm sunny evening in my field.

Model of the meeting for me was probably Andy Hewitt’s Bristol Scout. It looked just lovely in the air.
Big thanks from me too to CD Mike Smith and the whole team of cheerful, hardworking judges!

Last lot from me

1 Bill's Bucker Jungman 1st in Rubber

2 Bill's Caprioni CA100

3 Andrew Hewitt's Bristol Scout . This was flying beautifully but wasn't quite enough to beat Bill's RE8

4 Bill starting the Mills 1.3 in the RE8

5 The grass was long and the white daisy flowers made spotting a tailplane sticking out to grass more difficult. Getting a sight line of the landing was vital. Here Andrew gets a line on one model to help retrieve it.

Some more photos

1 My Hawker Tomtit. it flew the best it ever has except when it didn't

2 Martin Pikes ABC Robin

3 Martin Pikes Vellie Monocoupe which won the Electric/CO2 class

4 -5 Mike Smiths Airco DH9 Mail Plane

6 - Bill Dennis's RE8